By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
In this instance I suspect that other posters weren’t a million miles from the reality and they really don’t want fans to love Marti even more and then meltdown when his agent is talking to other clubs during the first international break.
Yes, the owners can spend if they personally guarantee the money, the problem is that when you come back to the Championship you’re under Championship FFP so you need to pass through the division quickly.
The key point though is that the 2020 election was decided by under 100k people in 3 states and it will be the same again in 2024.
Trump’s cultists would vote for him even if he died before the election. ‘Anyone but Trumps’ will vote Dem regardless of who is on the ticket.
The election rests upon whether Harris can get that c.100k people out to vote on the day or not. Trump can only win the election if turnout is poor so she will be tasked with living in the swing states until November hammering voter registration and Project 2025.
I mean it’s clear that the big beasts want Whitmer with Shapiro or Warnock but with Harris as VP and Bidens endorsement it’s going to be almost impossible to ditch her without alienating the small sliver of undecideds who will call the election and there isn’t much time to win them back.
With Harris the messaging will be pretty straightforward - a DA who targeted sex offenders vs a convicted felon adjudicated sex offender. The VP of the best economy in the world vs the guy who left a destroyed economy and the ‘young’ candidate vs the oldest presidential nominee ever.
On top of that she’s pro-choice who will run on codifying roe vs Wade and is obviously from a minority background.
She’s obviously not a slam dunk like Whitmer would be, hence the big beasts wanting to go that way but she should have enough to get the job done ultimately.
Trump hasn’t received a bump in polling since then. Trumps voters are committed cultists, at this point there is nobody who is ‘undecided’ and going to vote for him, it’s purely about whether the Dems can get enough people out to vote on the day.
Plenty of positives to take and there will be more signings to add.
The one ‘negative’ is I have to say I’m still not convinced with Larkeche, at least as a LB, he always seems like a winger who was told to be a full back late in the day and doesn’t understand the position. If someone were to come in for Paal I think we would have to go out and replace him.
Tough one with Armstrong - I can absolutely see the side who say he brings pace and power that we massively lack in this squad. Like many others I was excited when he was coming through and there was lots of hype and I hoped he would kick on and in some respects he has - clearly with coaching his decision making improved last year but his big problem has always been imo that he’s not an instinctive football player. When he has time to think he has started making better decisions but when he needs the react as seen in the previous friendly he still makes a horlicks of things.
Ultimately as well with the style Marti is looking to play this season he was never going to be more than a Plan C bench option - Armstrong playing ‘shexy futball’ is like replacing Busquets with Robbie Savage in those Barcelona sides…
On top of that his agent wanted bonkers money and clubs were offering good deals for him and it was a no brainer to let him go. He seems a good kid and I hope he manages to work it all out and have a decent career.
At this point Clive it’s impossible to smear Deutsche as the SEC absolutely eviscerated them for their lack of compliance, fraudulent accounting and outright criminality in regards Monte dei Paschi. Having copped to an enormous fine and blaming it all on Mitchell, Jain, Broeksmit and Roberts - who all had the benefit of being dead - it wouldn’t have been a great look for Deutsche to openly say ‘yeah we just let Trump do what he wanted as we loved the millions of $ in commissions we got’.
However even if Deutsche really *did* do their due diligence and felt the loans were fairly valued, it’s irrelevant as Trump lied on the applications therefore committing a crime.
In Stormy Daniels, paying her off was 100% not a crime, just as cheating on your post partum wife is *not* a crime. Listing the payoff as ‘legal expenses’ however *is* a crime.
Equally the fact that Michael Cohen is a disgraced felon himself in this case is completely irrelevant as a jury of Trumps peers, which included people who follow him on Truth Social, and which his legal team signed off on found Cohen more believable than Trumps defence and voted guilty unanimously on all counts……
I also personally don’t see issue with the AG (not DA) running on a platform of stopping Trumps criminality - the people of New York agreed with her and voted her in and ultimately he was found guilty twice in New York for his crimes..
The part that is uninformed CA is that the fact that Deutsche said they didn’t care about the loan value is irrelevant - that’s even if we overlook that of the 2x bankers at Deutsche who would work with Trump by this time, 1x killed himself once the SEC subpoenaed him and their other Vrablic was sacked by Deutsche and blacklisted in banking.
Lying to obtain credit is a crime regardless of whether or not you believe there is a ‘victim’. If I scam you out of your life savings, put it all on black, win and pay you back everything with interest, I’ve still committed a crime.
As to the election interference trial, the jury instructions clearly stated that in order to find Trump guilty of a felony, the jury must *believe* that he paid off Daniel’s in furtherance of a crime. The lack of unanimity is, as usual with Trump, a red herring - it was solely so that the jury didn’t get hung on for example 10x believing he did it to not affect the election and 2x believing he did it to stop his wife finding out.
That said, once again it’s all irrelevant - Trump was tried infront of a jury of his peers, a jury that his own lawyers helped form and signed off on and they *unanimously* found him guilty on all counts.
I mean that’s a bit of a mental statement considering that in a sane world Trump would’ve been on trial right now for Election Interference rather than a corrupt Supreme Court stalling for time and ensuring it can’t happen before the election.
He would then be tried on a slam dunk case of mishandling classified documents rather than a judge (with 4 prior cases) he appointed refusing to recuse from the case and then dismissing it, which will be overturned, to ensure it can’t happen before the election…
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
